Mailer diablo (talk | contribs) |
Mailer diablo (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
*'''Weak delete''', as there aren't enough pages to justify the existence of the template. [[User:Titoxd|Tito]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<span style="color:#008000;">xd</span>]]<sup>([[User_talk:Titoxd|?!?]] - [[Wikipedia:WikiProject edit counters/Flcelloguy's Tool|help us]])</sup> 06:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC) |
*'''Weak delete''', as there aren't enough pages to justify the existence of the template. [[User:Titoxd|Tito]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<span style="color:#008000;">xd</span>]]<sup>([[User_talk:Titoxd|?!?]] - [[Wikipedia:WikiProject edit counters/Flcelloguy's Tool|help us]])</sup> 06:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC) |
||
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #e3f9df; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> |
|||
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. '' |
|||
The result of the debate was moot - '''nomination withdrawn'''. - [[User:Mailer diablo|Mailer Diablo]] 08:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC) |
|||
==== [[Template:Oh My Goddess Extlnk]] ==== |
==== [[Template:Oh My Goddess Extlnk]] ==== |
||
<strike>{{lt|Oh My Goddess Extlnk}}<br /> |
<strike>{{lt|Oh My Goddess Extlnk}}<br /> |
||
Was intended for the purpose of linking to the same eight fan sites from every Ah My Goddess article (72 in all). I removed the fan site links; now the only link left is to the Ah My Goddess official web site, and a template isn't needed for that. - [[User:Brian Kendig|Brian Kendig]] 20:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC) ''Addendum:'' A few of the fan site links have been restored to the template, pending discussion. - [[User:Brian Kendig|Brian Kendig]] 13:52, 24 February 2006 (UTC)</strike> |
Was intended for the purpose of linking to the same eight fan sites from every Ah My Goddess article (72 in all). I removed the fan site links; now the only link left is to the Ah My Goddess official web site, and a template isn't needed for that. - [[User:Brian Kendig|Brian Kendig]] 20:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC) ''Addendum:'' A few of the fan site links have been restored to the template, pending discussion. - [[User:Brian Kendig|Brian Kendig]] 13:52, 24 February 2006 (UTC)</strike> |
||
''Nomination withdrawn.'' The content and purpose of the template have changed significantly since I filed the TfD request. It began as a way to put the same eight static fansite home page links into every article in the fandom; now it's a variable template, linking to fan pages which are specific to the articles from which they're linked. While I still have some issues with the content and implementation of the template, I believe these can be addressed and that the template is useful in its current form. - [[User:Brian Kendig|Brian Kendig]] 17:42, 27 February 2006 (UTC) |
'''Nomination withdrawn.''' The content and purpose of the template have changed significantly since I filed the TfD request. It began as a way to put the same eight static fansite home page links into every article in the fandom; now it's a variable template, linking to fan pages which are specific to the articles from which they're linked. While I still have some issues with the content and implementation of the template, I believe these can be addressed and that the template is useful in its current form. - [[User:Brian Kendig|Brian Kendig]] 17:42, 27 February 2006 (UTC) |
||
*'''Delete''', nom vote. - [[User:Brian Kendig|Brian Kendig]] 23:07, 23 February 2006 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''', nom vote. - [[User:Brian Kendig|Brian Kendig]] 23:07, 23 February 2006 (UTC) |
||
Line 90: | Line 94: | ||
***Now that ''is'' pointless. If the template is now different depending on what page it is on, why not just subst the lot of them and do the external links normally? This is only useful if the links are the same? --[[User:JiFish|JiFish]](<sup>[[User_talk:JiFish|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/JiFish|Contrib]]</sub>) 16:09, 27 February 2006 (UTC) |
***Now that ''is'' pointless. If the template is now different depending on what page it is on, why not just subst the lot of them and do the external links normally? This is only useful if the links are the same? --[[User:JiFish|JiFish]](<sup>[[User_talk:JiFish|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/JiFish|Contrib]]</sub>) 16:09, 27 February 2006 (UTC) |
||
****Why not subst all infoboxes and every template? It saves time to make it a template... --<small>[[User:Cool Cat|Cool Cat]]<sup>[[User talk:Cool Cat|Talk]]|[[Special:Emailuser/Cool Cat|@]]</sup></small> 16:30, 27 February 2006 (UTC) |
****Why not subst all infoboxes and every template? It saves time to make it a template... --<small>[[User:Cool Cat|Cool Cat]]<sup>[[User talk:Cool Cat|Talk]]|[[Special:Emailuser/Cool Cat|@]]</sup></small> 16:30, 27 February 2006 (UTC) |
||
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.</div> |
|||
==== [[Template:Gameinfo2]]==== |
==== [[Template:Gameinfo2]]==== |
Revision as of 08:58, 2 March 2006
February 22, 2006
Template:Gameinfo
Template:Gameinfo ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
For reasons stated at Template talk:Wikicities. Only siste projects are given box treatment, not any wiki, not even Wikicities. Hbdragon88 22:14, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom. - Brian Kendig 02:18, 23 February 2006 (UTC)Neutral now that it's text and not a box. I don't believe there are enough pages to link to that justify having this as a template, but I see no specific reason to oppose it. - Brian Kendig 17:47, 27 February 2006 (UTC)- Delete This belongs as an external link, if anything. Pagrashtak 03:03, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete
- Delete as per others. An ugly box if I may add... --Jared [T]/ 15:19, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- Change to a single line as had been done with Template:Wikicities. A template would be useful since links will eventually need to be added to a large number of articles, but I agree an infobox is inappropriate. - furrykef (Talk at me) 21:34, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- Done. Further voting should be done on the new version. - furrykef (Talk at me) 22:00, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep the modified version by Furrykef. — Instantnood 22:21, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- I had a look at the modified version - it's less ugly, but it's still unnecessary. Look at the articles which use it, then look at the pages they link to on the gameinfo wiki - the pages over there are practically stubs, with much less info than the Wikipedia articles. - Brian Kendig 02:13, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Some of them are, yes. I didn't make those links and I wouldn't have added them myself. A few pages on gameinfo do have extensive guides, such as Karateka (which doesn't use the gameinfo template currently, but there's no reason it couldn't), and I think a link could belong in that case. Moreover, just because there's not a lot of info there now doesn't mean there won't be later. Perhaps a link would encourage people to add information in the first place. - furrykef (Talk at me) 04:34, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia's purpose is to contain information, not to point people to external information. The only justification for an external link is when there's more information there than is in Wikipedia, and no one's yet made the effort to copy (with permission) or paraphrase (without permission) that info into Wikipedia. I really don't see a reason why we would want to encourage people to submit to some other project instead of Wikipedia. - Brian Kendig 06:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- I see no reason why Wikipedia's purpose can't be to contain and point to information. Moreover, Wikipedia is not a big catch-all repository of knowledge. A game walkthrough would be entirely inappropriate for an encyclopedia, but perfectly appropriate for gameinfo. (Indeed, gameinfo's primary purpose is as a place to hold such walkthroughs.) The same goes for reviews or casual discussion. The gameinfo wiki is not meant to replace Wikipedia game entries, but to supplement them. If you think gameinfo is not mature enough, that is a valid argument, but your argument that people should submit to Wikipedia instead strikes me as silly. - furrykef (Talk at me) 07:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a web directory. If there's a page out there which contains a game walkthrough, then sure, link to it from a Wikipedia article. But if there's a page out there which is merely a subset of what Wikipedia already contains, then what's the point of linking to it? - Brian Kendig 14:15, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- I agree, but the template can be kept for the pages that are not merely a subset of the Wikipedia information. We have a fair number of such games in the gameinfo wiki now (see the front page: any game listed there has a walkthrough at least started for it), and that list will continue to grow. - furrykef (Talk at me) 14:25, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed. I only hope that people don't feel that since this template exists it should be used to link to pages which don't contain anything that's not already in Wikipedia. - Brian Kendig 17:47, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- I agree, but the template can be kept for the pages that are not merely a subset of the Wikipedia information. We have a fair number of such games in the gameinfo wiki now (see the front page: any game listed there has a walkthrough at least started for it), and that list will continue to grow. - furrykef (Talk at me) 14:25, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a web directory. If there's a page out there which contains a game walkthrough, then sure, link to it from a Wikipedia article. But if there's a page out there which is merely a subset of what Wikipedia already contains, then what's the point of linking to it? - Brian Kendig 14:15, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- I see no reason why Wikipedia's purpose can't be to contain and point to information. Moreover, Wikipedia is not a big catch-all repository of knowledge. A game walkthrough would be entirely inappropriate for an encyclopedia, but perfectly appropriate for gameinfo. (Indeed, gameinfo's primary purpose is as a place to hold such walkthroughs.) The same goes for reviews or casual discussion. The gameinfo wiki is not meant to replace Wikipedia game entries, but to supplement them. If you think gameinfo is not mature enough, that is a valid argument, but your argument that people should submit to Wikipedia instead strikes me as silly. - furrykef (Talk at me) 07:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia's purpose is to contain information, not to point people to external information. The only justification for an external link is when there's more information there than is in Wikipedia, and no one's yet made the effort to copy (with permission) or paraphrase (without permission) that info into Wikipedia. I really don't see a reason why we would want to encourage people to submit to some other project instead of Wikipedia. - Brian Kendig 06:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Some of them are, yes. I didn't make those links and I wouldn't have added them myself. A few pages on gameinfo do have extensive guides, such as Karateka (which doesn't use the gameinfo template currently, but there's no reason it couldn't), and I think a link could belong in that case. Moreover, just because there's not a lot of info there now doesn't mean there won't be later. Perhaps a link would encourage people to add information in the first place. - furrykef (Talk at me) 04:34, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- I had a look at the modified version - it's less ugly, but it's still unnecessary. Look at the articles which use it, then look at the pages they link to on the gameinfo wiki - the pages over there are practically stubs, with much less info than the Wikipedia articles. - Brian Kendig 02:13, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- I think people should also improve the gameinfo wikicity. The template is useful for that, so keep. --Nintendude 18:34, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - Game walkthroughs etc are not considered appropriate wikipedia content, gameinfo is the 'best' place for them, I don't think abuse of the template is a good reason to delete it. Fuzzie 22:33, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Wikibooks is there for game walkthroughs. Super Smash Bros. Melee has a superb guide on everything. - Hbdragon88 06:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
- Weak delete, as there aren't enough pages to justify the existence of the template. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 06:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Template:Gameinfo2
Template:Gameinfo2 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Not a sister project. Fredrik Johansson 18:31, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete for reasons stated above. I don't believe it should encompass other Wikicities wikis. They can be put in external links if need be but not as a template. - Hbdragon88 22:07, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. - Brian Kendig 02:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete This belongs as an external link, if anything. Pagrashtak 03:04, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Change to single line as had been done with Template:Wikicities. - furrykef (Talk at me) 21:36, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Not our project. SchmuckyTheCat 21:55, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- OK, the template was changed. Further voting should be on the new version. - furrykef (Talk at me) 22:01, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep the modified version by Furrykef. — Instantnood 22:21, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- Have you looked at the code? It calls {{Gameinfo}} with a PAGENAME parameter — that's it. Pagrashtak 05:50, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, but that one's also listed for deletion... whether or not this one gets deleted will depend on whether or not the other one gets deleted... perhaps this should be condensed to a single TfD entry? - furrykef (Talk at me) 14:27, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- What I mean is that even if the gameinfo template stays, gameinfo2 should still go, because it's identical to writing {{gameinfo|{{PAGENAME}}}}. Pagrashtak 00:58, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
- Good point (although {{gameinfo2}} is easier to type) - furrykef (Talk at me) 07:24, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
- What I mean is that even if the gameinfo template stays, gameinfo2 should still go, because it's identical to writing {{gameinfo|{{PAGENAME}}}}. Pagrashtak 00:58, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, but that one's also listed for deletion... whether or not this one gets deleted will depend on whether or not the other one gets deleted... perhaps this should be condensed to a single TfD entry? - furrykef (Talk at me) 14:27, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Have you looked at the code? It calls {{Gameinfo}} with a PAGENAME parameter — that's it. Pagrashtak 05:50, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Template:Olympic Summer Games Host Cities
Template:Olympic Summer Games Host Cities ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Same reasons as at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 February 16#Template:Eurovision Song Contest host cities, this information is too trivial to warrant a big box at the end of every major city's article. If people are looking for it they'll find the Summer Olympic Games page and a perfectly useful list there. Delete Flowerparty■ 00:48, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep I disagree. I've found this box quite useful in the past, and it is no more trivial than any other template of this kind. Chairman S. | Talk 01:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, useful template. --Terence Ong 07:45, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- comment: I didn't mean to suggest that the template was useless - I'm sure some people will find it very useful. But I can't think a significant proportion of the visitors to the Montreal page, say, will be there seeking information on the Olympics that were held there in 1976 - certainly not enough to justify adding another navigation template to an already cluttered foot of the page. The point is that articles about cities are of largely geographical interest, and any navigation box at the bottom really ought to link to other cities on the basis of some shared geographical status, not because thay've all hosted a sports event which lasted two weeks and took place maybe several decades ago. Otherwise why not create templates for the IAAF World Championships in Athletics or the Commonwealth or Pan American Games? Flowerparty■ 09:20, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Abstain. I question if this could be better accomplished with a list page or/and category rather than including so much info on the city page unrelated to a city. --StuffOfInterest 12:32, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Comment What is the point of this template? They don't point to an actual page about that year's olympics, just a link to the generic city where it aas hosted at. Do we have inidvidual pages on each olympics? If so, they should be added in there and the template would be a much better navigation aid. - Hbdragon88 22:10, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, we do have such pages, see Template:Olympic Games, which is included on the Summer Olympic Games page. Flowerparty■ 23:14, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Useful enough, not purely "trivial". SushiGeek 23:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, {{Olympic Games}} is more effective at accomplishing the purpose of this template, in my opinion. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 23:19, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Comment The same arguments could be made to Template:Olympic Winter Games Host Cities as well. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:25, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Fair point, I hadn't noticed that one. See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 February 23#Template:Olympic Winter Games Host Cities. Flowerparty■ 00:15, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Replace with Category or List, then Delete - Doesn't make sense as a template, when it would serve better as one of the other two. Michael Ralston 23:43, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - useful. Ronline ✉ 07:54, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Make category and delete. Again, it's too big and is not relevant to anybody looking at the article on the city. Having a Category:Summer Olympic Games Host Cities or the like would be more than enough. Stifle 11:31, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Make category and delete. Info is better suited to a category. Having it listed as such at the end of each host city's article as a category jumper would allow users to quickly get all the information in one place (the category page). Iamvered 19:31, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, we have Category:Host cities of the Summer Olympic Games already. (I guess I should have mentioned that earlier) Flowerparty■ 20:28, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Easy to see the host cities on any Olympic Page where the template is placed, without having to look at the main Summer Olympic Page. - Nick C 20:42, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, and fix {{Olympic_Games}}. I suggest that we definitely delete this template and the other one as mentioned in the deletion summary, as they are redundant to the other template. I do suggest, however, that if it is possible, that we make it so that whenever someone mouses over a date on the {{Olympic Games}} template, it displays the name of the city and the year in that little yellow box that comes up. (i.e. If date is 2004, box will say Athens 2004. I think this will really work. --Jared [T]/ 12:45, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, but place only on host cities pages. -- Jjjsixsix (talk)/(contribs) @ 03:45, 27 February 2006 (UTC)